Death in Small Doses: Cambodia's Pesticides Problems and Solutions
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
DEATH IN SMALL DOSES Cambodia’s pesticide problems and solutions A report by the Environmental Justice Foundation Contents Acronyms used in this report APCPA Asia-Pacific Crop Protection Association Executive Summary ASEAN Association of South-East Asian Nations CEDAC Centre d’Etude et de Developpement Introduction - Agricole Cambodgien CIAP Cambodia-IRRI-Australia Project Global Pesticide Production and Use - CSIRO Commonwealth Scientific & Industrial Research Organisation CTBS Community Trap Barrier System An Overview of Cambodian Agriculture - DDT Dichloro-diphenyl-trichloroethane, a persistent organic insecticide Pesticide Use in Cambodia - FAO The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation FFS Farmer Field Schools Pesticides and Cambodian Law GDP Gross Domestic Product IPM Integrated Pest Management Cambodia’s Pesticide Problem: Causes - IRRI International Rice Research Institute IUCN International Union for the Conservation Cambodia’s Pesticide Problem: Dangers - of Nature LD50 Lethal Dose 50 - NGO Non-Governmental Organisation Alternatives & Solutions in Cambodian Agriculture PIC The Prior Informed Consent procedure of the Rotterdam Convention Conclusions and Recommendations - POPs Persistent Organic Pollutants RGC Royal Government of Cambodia Glossary UNEP The United Nations Environment Programme WHO World Health Organisation References WFP World Food Programme Acknowledgements This report was written, edited and produced by the Environmental Justice Environmental Justice Foundation is Foundation (Sylviane Nguyen-Vaucheret, Dr Mike Shanahan, Juliette a London-based non-governmental Williams and Steve Trent). Printed on % post-consumer waste paper. organisation. More information about EJF’s work and pdf versions of this Design by Dan Brown ([email protected]). report can be found at We wish to thank the following individuals who allowed us to use their images to www.ejfoundation.org. Comments on illustrate the report, provided critical reviews of earlier drafts, or assisted in other the report, requests for further copies or ways: Andrew Bartlett, David Glover, Yech Polo, Nop Poeuv, Colin Poole, specific queries about EJF should be William Murray, Bert van Durren, Em Sorany, Ngin Chhay, Merle Shepard, directed to [email protected]. Jim Puckett, Barbara Dinham, Rob Nugent, Rosie Sharpe, The This document should be cited as: Traveladdicts, Jan Suszkiw, Ariel Javellana, Gary Jahn, Mark Bell, Eugene EJF. Death in Small Doses: Hettel, Devlin Kuyek, Roopa Mathew, Diane Young, Ivor Greer, John Heard, Cambodia’s Pesticides Problems and Mike Meaney, Vicki Parsons, Brain Taylor, Terry Whittaker, Peter Schrock, Solutions. Environmental Justice Kit Whitney, James Skaptason, Grant Singleton, Frank Spangler, Bruce Foundation, London, UK. Sharp, Mike Hooper, Pierre Mineau, Brad Scholz. Special thanks go to Dr Yang Saing Koma and the staff of CEDAC whose pioneering studies’ findings on Cambodia’s pesticide problems and sustainable alternatives have been central to this report. In thanking these individuals, we in no way imply that they or their organisations fully endorse the report’s content. PESTICIDE TOXICITY CLASSIFICATION The World Health Organisation classifies pesticides according to acute toxicity, using the LD50 (Lethal Dose 50%) benchmark. LD50 denotes the amount of a chemical required to kill 50% of an exposed population of laboratory rats. There are two measures for each product, oral LD50 (the product is given orally) and dermal LD50 (the product is given through the skin). Oral LD50 Dermal LD50 mg per kg body weight required to kill 50% of rat population WHO category solids liquids solids liquids Ia Extremely hazardous 5 or below 20 or below 10 or below 40 or below Ib Highly hazardous 5-50 20-200 10-100 40-400 II Moderately hazardous 50-500 200-2000 100-1000 400-4000 III Slightly hazardous Over 500 Over 2000 Over 1000 Over 4000 N.B. The terms “solids” and “liquids” refer to the physical state of the active ingredient being classified executive summary G Pesticides have played a role in increasing crop G Much of Cambodian pesticide use is non- yields and food security but, in contrast to essential, especially in rice cultivation for modern products marketed in the developed which experts conclude that insecticides are world, many pesticides used in developing frequently not needed. Safer alternatives countries like Cambodia fail to meet include Integrated Pest Management (IPM), international quality standards. rice-fish culture and organic farming. Elsewhere in Asia, IPM has realised -% G Agriculture, rice production in particular, is of reductions in pesticide use without impacting major importance to Cambodian food security yield. Cambodian interest in organic farming and society, and pesticide use in this sector has was recently measured at % of interviewed accelerated in recent years. Unregulated farmers. imports have resulted in many chemicals banned by the Cambodian Government being G The Royal Government of Cambodia’s readily available on the domestic market. demonstration of political will to tackle the pesticide issue by banning hazardous G Cambodia faces human and environmental compounds, and the findings of this report, pesticide-related problems. Farmers and their show that genuine solutions and alternatives families are being poisoned and food, water are available. supplies and ecosystems are being polluted. % of pesticide-using farmers G This report recommends the adoption of the interviewed recently had experienced precautionary principle based on reduced use, symptoms of poisoning.The ultimate reduced risk and reduced dependence. Central consequences of the inappropriate use of such requirements are increased education and dangerous chemicals include human research into alternatives and stronger mortalities and illness, and long-term damage enforcement of Cambodian law.The to natural ecosystems and their productivity. Cambodian Government, donor community, NGOs, agrochemical industry and G Inappropriate pesticide use, including the Cambodia’s neighbours,Thailand and timing, frequency, concentration and type of Vietnam, all have roles to play in ameliorating products used, is widespread. Safety measures the current situation. are often ignored or misunderstood.This situation is exacerbated by a lack of G Cambodia’s economy, environment and food appreciation of risks associated with pesticides security would benefit in the long-term from and inadequate labelling that is usually in Thai the development of large-scale active or Vietnamese and is incomprehensible to even programmes to promote alternatives to current the minority of rural users who are literate. pesticide uses. G The direct cost of Cambodian pesticide use has been estimated at US$- million per year. Dangerous pesticides, unwanted by the rest of the world, are posing serious threats to Cambodian development targets. G Indirect costs of Cambodians’ inappropriate pesticide use include negative impacts on food security, on public health, on the export market, and on the burgeoning tourism industry. G Current practice can encourage pests’ resistance to pesticides. Cambodian farmers are becoming trapped on the ‘pesticide treadmill’, using increasing volumes in order to control perceived threats. G Western agrochemical companies’ product stewardship programmes fall short of pledges to promote safe use.The continued supply of chemicals severely restricted in the West to countries unable to ensure safe use is ethically questionable. © EJF A small price to pay for environmental jus�ce £5 / $6 per month could help kids get out of the cotton fields, end pirate fishing, protect farmers from deadly pesticide exposure, guarantee a place for climate refugees This report has been researched, wri�en and If you have found this free report valuable we ask published by the Environmental Jus�ce Founda�on you to make a dona�on to support our work. For less (EJF), a UK Registered charity working interna�onally than the price of a cup of coffee you can make a real to protect the natural environment and human rights. difference helping us to con�nue our work inves�ga�ng, documen�ng and peacefully exposing environmental Our campaigns include ac�on to resolve abuses injus�ces and developing real solu�ons to the problems. and create ethical prac�ce and environmental sustainability in co�on produc�on, shrimp farming It’s simple to make your dona�on today: & aquaculture. We work to stop the devasta�ng impacts of pirate fishing operators, prevent the use of www.ejfoundation.org/donate unnecessary and dangerous pes�cides and to secure and we and our partners around the world vital interna�onal support for climate refugees. will be very grateful. EJF have provided training to grassroots groups in Cambodia, Vietnam, Guatemala, Indonesia and Brazil to help them stop the exploita�on of their natural environment. Through our work EJF has learnt that even a small amount of training can make a massive difference to the capacity and a�tudes of local campaigners and thus the effec�veness of their campaigns for change. Protecting People and Planet introduction spend tourism industry. Perhaps the greatest US$ billion annually on tragedy is that Cambodia does not pesticides. However, even need to use such great volumes of approximately one-third of these pesticides. these pesticides (US$ In this report we provide a Dmillion in value) do not meet background to global pesticide internationally accepted quality production and Cambodian standards. Poor countries lacking